The National Trial Lawyers
  • Home
    • Meet Our Team
    • Contact Us
    • Mission & Goals
    • FAQ
  • Webinars
  • News
  • Membership Directory
    • Top 100 Map – Civil Plaintiff
    • Top 100 Map – Criminal Defense
    • Top 40 Under 40 Map – Civil Plaintiff
    • Top 40 Under 40 Map – Criminal Defense
  • Top 100
    • Civil Plaintiff Officers / Executive Committee
    • Criminal Defense Officers / Executive Committee
    • Benefits
    • About
    • Top 100 Presidents Message
    • Diplomat
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Top 100 Badge
  • Top 40
    • Civil Plaintiff Officers / Executive Committee
    • Criminal Defense Officers / Executive Committee
    • Top 40 Under 40 Trial Academy Bootcamp
    • Benefits
    • About
    • Top 40 Presidents Message
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Top 40 Badge
  • Specialty Assoc
    • About
    • Shop
    • Officers
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
  • Nominate
    • Top 100
    • Top 40
    • Specialty Association
    • Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame
    • Trial Lawyer of the Year
    • Trial Team of the Year
    • America’s Most Influential Trial Lawyer
    • America’s Most Influential Law Firm
    • Lifetime Achievement Award
  • Shop
  • Magazine
    • A-List
  • Education and Networking Agenda
    • Trial Lawyers Summit
    • Top 40 Under 40 Trial Academy Boot Camp
    • Mass Torts Made Perfect
    • The Lanier Trial Academy Master Class 6.0
    • The Business Of Law
    • Webinars
  • Hall of Fame
    • Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame

$1 Million in Attorneys’ Fees Awarded Against Pharmacy Giant Rite Aid

Posted on November 12, 2015 by Eleanor Smith

Attorneys' Fees

A law firm was awarded more than $1 in attorneys’ fees after a jury awarded its client $8.7 million in an employment termination case. The plaintiff, a former Rite Aid store manager, was wrongfully terminated and faced discrimination after he was injured in a store robbery.

Dedicated Employee Fired

Plaintiff Robert Leggins began working for Rite Aid in 1985 and filed suit in 2013. The suit stemmed from workplace discrimination that Leggins alleged started after he was injured in the store robbery. Leggins also alleged that since the arrival of a new district manager, he had experienced discrimination based on both his race and disability.

Leggins was working in the Rite Aid store he was tasked with running one night in 2007 when the robbery occurred. He was attacked during the robbery and suffered a neck injury that led to several surgeries. Leggins alleged that despite his injury, his supervisors forced him to do hard manual labor and mocked him for his injury. At times, Rite Aid management even implied he was faking it to shirk his work duties.

Leggins asked the new Rite Aid district manager for a transfer to a smaller store in a better neighborhood so he could work around his hurt neck, but the manager told him that “all black people do is complain.” Rite Aid responded that the decision to fire Leggins was the culmination of his failure to perform his job adequately for the previous two years. Rite Aid’s motion for summary judgment called Leggins’ allegations about race and disability discrimination “his own rank speculation.”

See Also: Utah Employees Now Have the Right to Self-Defense in the Workplace

Leggins brought suit in 2013 and the jury agreed with him that the company harassed and punished him for his injury. The jury did not find, however, that the company or its managers discriminated against Leggins for his race. The jury awarded Leggins $3.7 million for lost wages and other losses plus an additional $5 million in punitive damages for his claims of discrimination and wrongful termination.

A Textbook Discrimination Case

Earlier this summer, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Michael L. Stern denied two Rite Aid post-trial motions seeking to slash or vacate the verdict. Despite standing firm on his decision in the case, Stern said it was “vigorously contested with good attorneys on both sides” with numerous witnesses.

According to the state of California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), a court has the discretion to award to the prevailing party reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs in these situations. Judge Stern said while the case appeared to be a “garden variety” employment matter, the legal fight surrounding it certainly was not.

Leggins’ attorney, Carney Shegerian said:

“Realistically, how many plaintiffs’ attorneys (let alone plaintiffs) can afford the raw costs, overhead staffing, and firm costs to take a case like this – with its difficult facts – to trial against a global law firm such as Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, which used an army of attorneys at trial, numerous additional attorneys throughout litigation, and a plethora of paralegals, assistants, staff, and other personnel who were present both inside and outside the courtroom? The only reason attorneys would risk their money and time on such a venture, while declining other lucrative matters, would be the expectation that, if they prevail and vindicate critical statutory rights against a large employer, they will be fully compensated for the massive risk undertaken, with an enhancement for the sheer difficulties of a case like this and the superior results obtained.”

Rite Aid attorneys argued the $500 and $700 per hour numbers Leggins’ attorneys sought were unreasonable. Counsel for Rite Aid also tried pointing out that Leggins’ case is just a “run of the mill” termination case not unique in its defense. Judge Stern disagreed and acknowledged the rates could be due to inflation, but are in no way “off the charts.”

Posted in Blog, Business Law, Employment

Comments are closed.

News Categories

Read about other Top Jury Verdicts

The New Mexico Supreme Court Upholds $165 Million Damage Awards in a Deadly FedEx Crash

The New Mexico Supreme Court Upholds $165 Million Damage Awards in a Deadly FedEx Crash

The New Mexico Supreme Court on Thursday upheld $165 million of jury awards against FedEx in a wrongful-death lawsuit stemmin[Read More...]
Noom Reaches a $56 Million Class Action Settlement Over Its Autorenewal and Cancellation Policy

Noom Reaches a $56 Million Class Action Settlement Over Its Autorenewal and Cancellation Policy

Weight-loss program Noom has agreed to a $56 million settlement to resolve class action claims regarding its autorenewal and [Read More...]
Virginians Will Receive $489 Million in a Payday Loan Settlement

Virginians Will Receive $489 Million in a Payday Loan Settlement

Online payday loan companies that charged as much as 919% interest will spend $489 million to reimburse some 555,000 borrower[Read More...]
The State of Minnesota Will Pay $1.5 Million to a Man Who Alleged Excessive Force During an Arrest

The State of Minnesota Will Pay $1.5 Million to a Man Who Alleged Excessive Force During an Arrest

Minneapolis has agreed to pay $1.5 million to a man who said police used excessive force when he was arrested during the prot[Read More...]
A $230 Million Settlement Is Reached Over a 2015 Southern California Oil Spill

A $230 Million Settlement Is Reached Over a 2015 Southern California Oil Spill

The owner of an oil pipeline that spewed thousands of barrels of crude oil onto Southern California beaches in 2015 has agree[Read More...]

#LegalNews

@@TheNTLtop100

Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

Attorney information and content provided on this website is provided for the benefit of members of The National Trial Lawyers and as a public service by Legal Associations Management, Inc. The website and all data are the property of Legal Associations Management, Inc. Data, including without limitation attorney information and content, on the site may not be mined, sold, or used commercially for any purpose without the explicit written consent of Legal Associations Management, Inc. This site may not be accessed by any automated program for extracting data for any use. By accessing and using the site you agree that you will not develop, support or use software, devices, scripts, robots, or any other means or processes (including crawlers, browser plug-ins and add-ons, or any other technology) to scrape data or otherwise copy profiles and other data. Unauthorized use or attempted unauthorized use of this system may subject you to both civil and criminal penalties.